project title: evaluation of performance of kaz ct100 ... · project: kaz ct-100 field test project...

Client: KAZ Corp Date: January 2008 Project: KAZ CT-100 Field Test Project Code: KAZmosqaceragetest07-Part 1 Test Method: 423-1.00

of 24

Project Title: Evaluation of Performance of KAZ CT100 Mosquito Vacuum in Trapping Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes

Released Under Field Conditions- Part 1 With Malaise Traps

Part 2 CT100 Trap Only Method (without Malaise traps)

Test Date(s): September 18, 2007 – January 12, 2008

Report Date: January 2008

Authored by:

Eric Snell, Todd Smith and David Weiner Snell Scientifics, LLC 472 Cannafax Road

Barnesville, GA 30204 770.358.4591


of 24

Part 1: Objectives: 1. To determine the efficacy of KAZ CT100 Mosquito Vacuum in trapping Aedes aegypti mosquitoes

released under field conditions.

Treatments:

1. Control 2. KAZ Mosquito Trap Model #CT100 w/lure and Malaise traps

Materials and Methods: The following is the Snell Scientifics Standardized Testing Method for the evaluation of the Attraction Distance and Area Coverage of Flying Insect Traps. Further details related to this specific test are described following the test method summary. Select action items and illustrations have been removed from this standardized test method in an effort to make the report more precise and accurate to the test conducted. Any details removed from this test method were deemed irrelevant to the test conducted in this report. 423.1 Materials: 423.1.1 Plots: Open area large enough to contain each test set up

(maximum size depends on the maximum distance for release points; ¼ acre release points require 1 acre or larger field, ½ acre release points require 1.25 acre or larger field, and 1 acre release points require 1.5 acre or larger field)

423.1.2 Test products - Placed in center of test area (one per plot set-up) 423.1.3 Malaise-type traps (4 needed: includes all hardware for anchoring, bottles for collection, etc.) 423.1.4 5 gallon plastic buckets for mosquitoes (4 per plot) 423.1.5 Modified funnel tops for each mosquito buckets (with screen to discourage them from flying

out during winds over 1 mile per hour 423.1.6 Tape measure (to measure locations of release buckets) 423.1.7 Hand lens and light source to aid in sorting contents of trap 423.1.8 Instruments to measure conditions: wind (speed & direction), temp, humidity,

rainfall. Instruments placed in the center of single plot tests, on in a centralized area for tests involving multiple plots. (HOBO Weather Station, Model # MAN-H21, Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne MA)

423.1.9 Data sheets to record observations 423.1.10 Mosquitoes (typically A. aegypti) in sufficient numbers for test needs 423.1.11 Digital camera to record set up


of 24

423.2 Methods: 423.2.1 Test trap should be operating properly prior to start of test. 423.2.2 Position one (1) Test trap in the middle of a test plot. 423.2.3 On each side of the trap, place 1 Malaise trap facing outward (4 total/plot). 423.2.4 Malaise traps should be side-by-side to create a ‘seal’ around the Test trap. 423.2.5 With Test trap placed in the center, the field will be marked as ¼, ½ and 1 acre circles surrounding the Test trap.

• ¼ acre circle = 18 meters radius (59.1 ft) from Test trap. • ½ acre circle = 25.5 meter radius (83.7 ft) from Test trap. • 1 acre circle = 35.9 meter radius (117.8 ft) from Test trap.

423.2.6 Four (4) 5 gallon containers (per plot) are made up to contain ~ 100 live adult mosquitoes (~ 400 total per plot). The 5 gallon containers are modified with a funnel lid. Lid with screens to allow air movement from wind) allows the mosquito’s easy exit from the container by free will, not by disruption or force. The mosquitoes can detect the rate of wind current and remain in their release bucket until the air flow is below 1 mile per hour.

423.2.7 After the mosquitoes are introduced into the containers, the containers are sealed to prevent escape during transport to the field prior to start of test. 423.2.8 Four (4) 5 gallon containers containing mosquitoes are positioned around the

test trap at the selected acreage test distance. Each container is positioned at 90 degree intervals, directly in front of each Malaise trap.

423.2.9 Mosquitoes are positioned on all 4 sides at the desired distance (¼, ½, or 1) 423.2.10 The seals are removed from the funnel lids, allowing mosquitoes to escape the containers at the same time of the day on the start of each consecutive test. 423.2.11 Tests Performed (for each Trap tested)

• 2-4 reps at select distance(s) from the test product o i.e. 2-4 reps with ¼ acre, 2-4 reps with ½ acre, 2-4 at 1 acre

423.2.12 The duration of the test can be 4 hours or 18-24 hours 423.2.13 After the test duration has expired, data will be collected as:

• The number of mosquitoes released at each circle (count any remaining inside 5 gallon containers, to get an accurate count of how many were released).

• The number of released mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti) collected in the 4 Malaise traps for each plot (data will be specific to the malaise trap location and correlated with the average wind direction over the release period)

• Since A. aegypti are not normal in the Georgia area, all mosquitoes of this species caught will be those released at the start of the test.

• Other species will not be recorded as the distance they traveled can not be confirmed. • Data will be record as to which side (N, S, E, W) of the test product mosquitoes were

caught. • Wind speed and direction and other factors affecting the test can be monitored by the

weather station at all practical intervals as required by the test. • If control data has a higher number from a certain side, that side may be cut from the

test altogether due natural wind influences.


of 24

• Control tests will be alternated with test products to balance out the time of year and changing environmental conditions.

423.2.14 Additional Testing Details Not Fully Described in Standard Protocols: Test Set-Up: The evaluations in this test followed Illustrations and Photographs Replicates: Insect Stage Tested: adult mixed gender # of Reps: 2 # of Insects/Rep: ~400 Source of Test Specimens: Specimens taken from lab colonies reared from larvae originally obtained

from Benzon Research, Carlisle PA Conditions in Test Area: Weather condition summaries contained in Table 9. Confirming Test Specimen Condition:

All mosquitoes were confirmed ‘alive’ 2 times prior to release: 1) the insects were removed from the breeding container by transferring only live insects to release container, 2) after all insects were transferred to the release containers, they were confirmed to be viable before any releases were made.


of 24

423.3 Photographs and illustrations: 423.3.1 Custom Frame design for Free Standing Malaise traps

(to prevent movement in wind)

423.3.2 Exploded view of Custom Frame (for assembly & replication purposes)


of 24

423.3.2 Assembled Malaise trap (Townes version)

423.3.4 Four Malaise traps at middle of 1 acre circle


of 24

423.3.5 Four Malaise traps around station/trap

423.3.6 Weather Station inside Malaise Traps


of 24

423.3.7 Weather Station inside Malaise Traps

423.3.8 Weather station inside Malaise traps


of 24

423.3.9 Mosquito release bucket

423.3.10 Detail of Modified lid of Mosquito release bucket


of 24

Results / Discussion – Part 1:

The results of this study are tabulated in Tables 1-6. Table 1-3 illustrate the average capture of mosquitoes of the traps at each distance. Tables 4-6 were compiled to illustrate the significant statistical differences (if any) between the control replicates and the device replicates. Table 9 displays the relevant weather data recorded for the period covered by the tests.

Capture rates for the devices and time frames were statistically compared with a t test for independent samples. All tests were conducted using a one-tailed distribution and probability value of p<.05. Statistically, the results of the tests at ¼ acre distance did demonstrate a significant difference between the CT100 replicates and the control replicates (Table 4). Additionally, the data (Table 1) provides that the CT100 captured over twice the percentage of mosquitoes as did the control replicates. This test took place in warmer weather (Table 9), when the mosquitoes were more active making the data less reliable. The results of the tests at ½ acre demonstrated a significance difference (Table 5). In this test, the empirical percentages of capture by the CT100 were almost 3 times greater than the control replicates (14% vs 5%). Discussion of the statistical results of the final tests of the CT100 at 1 acre for Part 1 is divided into three tables. Table 6 illustrates the significant statistical results of the 1 acre tests with the CT100 conducted in the warmer weather. As stated above, this was a time when the mosquitoes were more active and the data less dependable. Table 7 shows the significant results of the test conducted as the weather cooled. The mosquitoes were less active, but more dependable to go to the trap with ‘purpose’ instead of the random pattern of flight seen in warmer weather. These are ideal tests as they were all run in similar weather over just a few days time. These tests provide significant proof of the validity of the statistical comparisons. Table 8 demonstrates the combined results of both the colder and warmer weather testing periods. These results do not have any statistical significance due to the wide range of activity between the various temperatures. The data obtained in this series of tests shows that the trap is stronger the closer it is located to the mosquito sources. Based on the data presented in this report, the CT100 clearly has a significantly measurable level of mosquito attraction at ¼ and ½ acre. Additionally, the ability to prove the attraction at 1 acre distance is shown in a range of methods here. Due to the seasonal issues and test sensitivity, a second method (Part 2) without the Malaise traps, was used to more thoroughly demonstrate the significance of the CT100’s attraction at 1 acre.


of 24

Tables: Table 1.

Total % of Aedes aegyptyi Mosquitoes That Escaped from Release Buckets Caught in all

Traps (4 malaise traps and test trap) All Replicates at 1/4 Acre

1/4 acre Control 9% 1/4 acre Control 6%

Average 8% 1/4 acre CT100 w/lure 21% 1/4 acre CT100 w/lure 13%

Average 17% Table 2.


Traps (4 malaise traps and test trap) All Replicates at 1/2 Acre

1/2 acre Control 5% 1/2 acre Control 4%

Average 5% 1/2 acre CT100 w/lure 15% 1/2 acre CT100 w/lure 12%

Average 14% Table 3.


Traps (4 malaise traps and test trap) All Replicates at 1 Acre

1 acre Control 5% 1 acre Control 4%

Average 5% 1 acre CT100 w/lure 6% 1 acre CT100 w/lure 3%

Average 5%


of 24

Table 4.

Statistical Comparison of Total % of Mosquitoes Captured in Tests w/Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Completed in Warmer Weather Conditions at 1/4 Acre

Distance from CT-100 and Control 2 Replicates ~ 400 Mosquitoes Released per Replicate

Control CT100 W/ Propane and Lure 0.003 0.022 0.009 0.012 0.021 0.065 0.027 0.074

0.034 0.017 0.016 0.011 0.022 0.025 0.022 0.036 0.013

0.054

Statistical Significance 0.046 Table 5.

Statistical Comparison of Total % of Mosquitoes Captured in Tests w/Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Completed in Warmer Weather Conditions at 1/2 Acre


Control CT100 W/ Propane and Lure 0.009 0.015 0.009 0.015 0.018 0.008 0.015 0.026

0.083 0.016 0.018 0.012 0.009 0.008 0.027 0.004 0.018

0.051

Statistical Significance 0.033


of 24

Table 6.

Control CT100 W/ Propane and Lure

0.018 0.006

0.015 0.012

0.012 0.0060.009 0.012

0.0270.008 0.0040.016 0.0040.011 0.008

0.005 0.0080.000


Statistical Comparison of Total % of Mosquitoes Captured in Tests w/Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Completed in Warmer Weather Conditions at 1 Acre


Table 7.


0.000 0.0060.000 0.0120.000 0.0060.000 0.003

0.0000.003 0.007

0.007 0.0040.000 0.0000.000 0.004

0.0110.000 0.0040.000 0.0040.000 0.0000.000 0.000


Statistical Comparison of Total % of Mosquitoes Captured in Tests w/Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Completed in Cold Weather Conditions at 1 Acre Distance

from CT-100 and Control 3 Replicates ~ 400 Mosquitoes Released per Replicate


of 24

Table 8.


0.000 0.0060.000 0.0120.000 0.0060.000 0.003

0.0000.003 0.007

0.007 0.0040.000 0.0000.000 0.004

0.0110.000 0.0040.000 0.0040.000 0.0000.000 0.000

0.0420.018 0.006

0.015 0.012

0.012 0.0060.009 0.012

0.0270.008 0.0040.016 0.0040.011 0.008

0.005 0.0080.000


Statistical Comparison of Total % of Mosquitoes Captured in Tests w/Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Completed Under All Weather Conditions

at 1 Acre Distance from CT-100 and Control 5 Replicates ~ 400 Mosquitoes Released per Replicate


of 24

Table 9. Relevant Weather Data

Ave of Weather Data Recorded by HOBO Weather Station for Field Locations for Testing Period (Recorded Dates Not Contiguous Due to Alternation of Tests to

Balance Out Time of Year and Changing Environmental Factors)

Recording Date Range Test

Wind Speed (MPH)

Gust Speed (MPH)

Wind Direction

(ø) Temperature

(*F) RH (%)

9/20 - 9/24 and 10/17 - 10/18

1/4 Acre control 1.73 7.18 137.58 70.22 82.54

10/10 - 10/13 1/4 Acre CT100 1.35 5.90 192.63 68.27 78.49

10/16 - 10/17 and 10/24 - 10/26

1/2 Acre Control 1.74 7.02 179.62 63.19 84.46

10/18 - 10/19 and 10/26 - 10/29

1/2 Acre CT100 1.57 6.66 193.63 61.74 84.58

10-25 - 10/29, 11/02 -11/05, and 12/07 - 12/08

1 Acre Control 1.43 6.60 212.70 52.99 74.11

10/30 - 10/31, 11/06 - 11/07, and 12/05 - 12/07

1 Acre CT100 1.58 6.97 247.95 49.76 69.09


of 24

Part 2: Objectives: 1. To determine the efficacy of KAZ CT100 Mosquito Vacuum in trapping Aedes aegypti mosquitoes released under field conditions.

Treatments:

3. Control 4. KAZ Mosquito Trap Model #CT100 w/lure only

Materials and Methods: The following is the Snell Scientifics Standardized Testing Method for the evaluation of the Attraction Distance and Area Coverage of Flying Insect Traps. Further details related to this specific test are described following the test method summary. Select action items and illustrations have been removed from this standardized test method in an effort to make the report more precise and accurate to the test conducted. Any details removed from this test method were deemed irrelevant to the test conducted in this report. 423.1 Materials: 423.1.1 Plots: Open area large enough to contain each test set up

(maximum size depends on the maximum distance for release points; ¼ acre release points require 1 acre or larger field, ½ acre release points require 1.25 acre or larger field, and 1 acre release points require 1.5 acre or larger field)

423.1.2 Test products - Placed in center of test area (one per plot set-up) 423.1.3 5 gallon plastic buckets for mosquitoes (4 per plot) 423.1.4 Modified funnel tops for each mosquito buckets (with screen to discourage them from flying

out during winds over 1 mile per hour 423.1.5 Tape measure (to measure locations of release buckets) 423.1.6 Hand lens and light source to aid in sorting contents of trap 423.1.7 Instruments to measure conditions: wind (speed & direction), temp, humidity,

rainfall. Instruments placed in the center of single plot tests, on in a centralized area for tests involving multiple plots. (HOBO Weather Station, Model # MAN-H21, Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne MA)

423.1.8 Data sheets to record observations 423.1.9 Flying insects (typically A. aegypti) in sufficient numbers for test needs 423.1.10 Digital camera to record set up


of 24

423.2 Methods: 423.2.1 Test trap should be operating properly prior to start of test. 423.2.2 Position one (1) Test trap in the middle of a test plot. 423.2.3 With Test trap placed in the center, the field will be marked as ¼, ½ and/or

1 acre circles surrounding the Test trap (as applicable) • ¼ acre circle = 18 meters radius (59.1 ft) from Test trap. • ½ acre circle = 25.5 meter radius (83.7 ft) from Test trap. • 1 acre circle = 35.9 meter radius (117.8 ft) from Test trap.

423.2.4 Four (4) 5 gallon containers (per plot) are made up to contain flying insects (typically ~ 100 live adult mosquitoes (~ 400 total per plot). The 5 gallon containers are modified with a funnel lid. Lid (with screens to allow air movement from wind) allows the insect’s easy exit from the container by free will, not by disruption or force. The insects can detect the rate of wind current and remain in their release bucket until the air flow is suitable (for mosquitoes, this is below 1 mile per hour).

423.2.5 After the insects are introduced into the containers, the containers are sealed to prevent escape during transport to the field prior to start of test. 423.2.6 Four (4) 5 gallon containers containing insects are positioned around the

test trap at the selected acreage test distance. Each container is positioned at 90 degree intervals, directly in front of each trap.

423.2.7 Insect release buckets s are positioned on all 4 sides at the desired distance 423.2.8 The seals are removed from the funnel lids, allowing insects to escape the containers at the same time of the day on the start of each consecutive test. 423.2.9 The test is replicated 2 or more times (depending on statistical relevance) 423.2.10 The duration of the test can be 4 hours or 18-24 hours 423.2.11 After the test duration has expired, data will be collected as:

• The number of insects released at each circle (count any remaining inside 5 gallon containers, to get an accurate count of how many were released).

• The number of released insects (such as Aedes aegypti) collected in the tested device for each plot (data will be specific to the device location and correlated with the average wind direction over the release period)

• Since A. aegypti are not normal in the Georgia area, all mosquitoes of this species caught will be those released at the start of the test.

• Other species will not be recorded as the distance they traveled can not be confirmed. • Wind speed and direction and other factors affecting the test can be monitored by the

weather station at all practical intervals as required by the test. • Control tests will be alternated with test products to balance out the time of year and

changing environmental conditions.


of 24

423.2.12 Additional Testing Details Not Fully Described in Standard Protocols: Test Set-Up: The evaluations in this test followed Illustrations and Photographs Replicates: Insect Stage Tested: mixed gender adults # of Reps: 2 # of Insects/Rep: ~400 Source of Test Specimens: Specimens taken from lab colonies reared from larvae originally obtained

from Benzon Research, Carlisle PA Conditions in Test Area: Weather condition summaries contained in Table 2. Confirming Test Specimen Condition:

All mosquitoes were confirmed ‘alive’ 2 times prior to release: 1) the insects were removed from the breeding container by transferring only live insects to release container, 2) after all insects were transferred to the release containers, they were confirmed to be viable before any releases were made.


of 24

423.3 Photographs and illustrations: 423.3.1 Trap in field next to weather center

423.3.2 Front view of Trap set up


of 24

423.3.3 Surrogate Trap set up: no lure no propane

423.3.4 Close up view of trap with lure and propane activated


of 24

423.3.5 Side view of surrogate trap showing battery box

423.3.6 Back view close up of surrogate trap with battery exposed


of 24

423.3.7 Mosquito release bucket

423.3.8 Detail of Modified lid of Mosquito release bucket


of 24

Part 2: Results / Discussion:

This discussion reflects the results of the second part to the testing of the CT100 under field conditions. This should be considered the ideal test: warm weather and with a direct comparison of an identical trapping device but with no CO2 production. The first series of tests (Part 1) utilized four Malaise traps per test and demonstrates how the CT100 performs to attract mosquitoes at ¼, ½ and 1 acre distances. However, the data and method presented in this report focuses on the 1 acre distance without the use of the Malaise traps. The CT100 is compared to a modified CT100 (without any CO2 attraction) by using only the trap captures for the analysis.

Before starting any tests, the modified ‘Control’ CT100 was tested by releasing mosquitoes close to the intake ports of the trap after measuring the fan’s wind velocity with an anemometer. Mosquitoes that were around the intake ports were captured. As the data shows, the modified ‘Control’ CT100 also caught the released mosquitoes during the actual field tests. This is evidence that the control design being utilized was valid to monitor native populations as well. The CT100 trap used as a control (without CO2) still had residue of the lure (octenol) soaked into the plastic from prior uses and had some heat source, both of which presumably have the capacity to attract some mosquitoes. These properties actually work to ‘attract’ mosquitoes in their own right, which adds to the validity of this control-to-treatment comparison. Capture rates for the devices and time frames were statistically compared with a test for independent samples. All tests were conducted using a one-tailed distribution and probability value of p<.05. The results shown in Table 1 demonstrate that the CT100 results showed significant statistical differences from the control replicates. These results substantially show the effects of a CT100 as an attractant over a 1 acre plot.


of 24

Tables: Table 1.

Statistical Comparison of Total % of Mosquitoes Captured in Tests w/Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Completed w/CT100 Fan Only -vs- CT100 w/Propane and Lure at 1 Acre Distance from CT-100

and Control 5 Replicates ~ 400 Mosquitoes Released per Replicate

CT100 fan only CT100 W/ Propane and Lure 0.61 2.25 1.21 2.94


Table 2.

Ave of Weather Data Recorded by HOBO Weather Station for Field Locations for Testing Period

1/07/08 - 1/09/08 1 acre CT100 AND Control 1.09 6.71 139.96 55.68 81.07

1/09/08-1/10/08 1 Acre CT100 (no malaise) 0.87 6.89 183.27 60.77 87.60

1/10/08- 1/12/08

1 acre control CT100 Fan Only (no malaise) 0.80 7.26 217.21 59.44 84.57

project title: evaluation of performance of kaz ct100 ... · project: kaz ct-100 field test project...

Documents